You are here: Home > Message Board > Palace Talk > Newcastle Utd vs Crystal Palace - Match Thread
November 30 2022 3.11am

Newcastle Utd vs Crystal Palace - Match Thread

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 20 of 22 < 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 >

Play our World Cup 2022 Prediction League!

World Cup Prediction League 2022

Sponsor a forum or Advertise on the HOL!


 

View trapperjohn's Profile trapperjohn Flag Horsham 05 Sep 22 8.31am Send a Private Message to trapperjohn Add trapperjohn as a friend

Originally posted by steeleye20

The PGMOL have reviewed and found the goal should have stood.

Which of course makes it obvious it was correctly ruled out!

Offside and foul on the keeper.

I really enjoyed the dismay at the final whistle when they realised all their money couldn't even buy them a goal.

Even now Peter Walton in the Times disagrees and says decision was correct. So hardly a clear cut “mistake”

 


I got vision, and the rest of the world wears bifocals.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View taylors lovechild's Profile taylors lovechild Flag 05 Sep 22 8.35am Send a Private Message to taylors lovechild Add taylors lovechild as a friend

Whether it should have stood or not, it would have been a lucky goal not one that was crafted out. Newcastle look like they might do quite well as a premium-quality Burnley this season with big, strong lads and lots of direct balls. However, I still can't shake the thought out of my head that the day Shearer and the owners take to social media to complain about a VAR call a woman in Saudi Arabia is sentenced to 45 years for sharing a few tweets to her 153 followers, while orphan girls are dragged into the street and beaten for asking for rights.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Putitout's Profile Putitout Flag Oxford 05 Sep 22 9.26am Send a Private Message to Putitout Add Putitout as a friend

Referees, their decisions, have always been sport. Always will , as we will never avoid the contentious in football decisions. Even with VAR that remains the case as VAR highlights the contentious decision. It doesn’t stop it being contentious.
The worry for me is that the bleating of certain managers and high profile ex players, appears now to be intimidating referees and the whole refereeing system, simply by appealing to a broader and broader base of opinion.
No matter what the decision, no matter how many people look at the situation , it remains contentious in many cases if not all. Why we should need the PGMOL to look at this I don’t know. Unless we are moving to what VAR started, and games will be refereed totally from a room miles from the ground. No matter the contentious would remain, only the Shearers, would have no one to bleat to.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View eritheagle's Profile eritheagle Flag Erith 05 Sep 22 9.26am Send a Private Message to eritheagle Add eritheagle as a friend

Originally posted by trapperjohn

Even now Peter Walton in the Times disagrees and says decision was correct. So hardly a clear cut “mistake”

I think that in past seasons the goal may have been ruled ok or a penalty given but I think that this season with the new 'letting minimal contact go' stance then they decided to rule it out.
I don't think it was the violent push it's been made out to be.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Putitout's Profile Putitout Flag Oxford 05 Sep 22 9.47am Send a Private Message to Putitout Add Putitout as a friend

Originally posted by eritheagle

I think that in past seasons the goal may have been ruled ok or a penalty given but I think that this season with the new 'letting minimal contact go' stance then they decided to rule it out.
I don't think it was the violent push it's been made out to be.

I agree Mitchells hand on Willock was minimal touch. Players are putting hands on all the time, it has been ignored by refs for years now. And this year in particular ,due to pressure from clubs ,managers, players, and others referees are allowing more and more of this if not considered extreme. The clear fact was Willock flattened the goalkeeper and you really can not do that, the strength of any push was difficult to assess ,flattening the goalkeeper wasn’t. The rules used to be fairly simple, applied simply . Now all those involved tend to want it all ways, that’s until what they wanted smacks them in the face.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Willo's Profile Willo Flag South coast - west of Brighton. 05 Sep 22 9.48am Send a Private Message to Willo Add Willo as a friend

Originally posted by eritheagle

I think that in past seasons the goal may have been ruled ok or a penalty given but I think that this season with the new 'letting minimal contact go' stance then they decided to rule it out.
I don't think it was the violent push it's been made out to be.

So far as I can see with my aged eyes, Mitchell just put his hand up as they were both challenging for the ball and any contact was minimal, there was no shove, Willock then leapt into Guaita and knocked him to the ground.FOUL.

I suspect three will be those who are of the opinion that I am in dire need of an urgent visit to 'SpecSavers'!

Edited by Willo (05 Sep 2022 9.55am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Putitout's Profile Putitout Flag Oxford 05 Sep 22 9.56am Send a Private Message to Putitout Add Putitout as a friend

Originally posted by Willo

So far as I can see with my aged eyes, Mitchell just put his hand up as they were both challenging for the ball and any contact was minimal, there was no shove, Willock then leapt into Guaita and knocked him to the ground.FOUL.

Edited by Willo (05 Sep 2022 9.49am)

I start to wonder if the much hyped atmosphere that is St James park nowadays is being allowed to influence how this particular decision is being viewed even by such as the PGMOL.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wilesy01's Profile Wilesy01 Flag Bristol 05 Sep 22 9.58am Send a Private Message to Wilesy01 Add Wilesy01 as a friend

Willock's momentum was going to wipe out Guiata regardless of the contact from Mitchell.

I really do not understand the furore over this incident. Yes, I'd be cheesed off if I was a Toon fan but it's certainly not on the level as the Mendy incident against West Ham on Saturday and it's disingenuous to pretend that it is.

Really starting to dislike Newcastle.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Willo's Profile Willo Flag South coast - west of Brighton. 05 Sep 22 10.03am Send a Private Message to Willo Add Willo as a friend

Originally posted by Wilesy01

Willock's momentum was going to wipe out Guiata regardless of the contact from Mitchell.

I really do not understand the furore over this incident. Yes, I'd be cheesed off if I was a Toon fan but it's certainly not on the level as the Mendy incident against West Ham on Saturday and it's disingenuous to pretend that it is.

Really starting to dislike Newcastle.

I would have been molten with anger, as a long-standing fan of our club, if the goal had been awarded.

If the goal had been allowed to stand I suspect many of us would have concluded that the decision was based on the fact that the incident took place at St James' Park, favouring the Home team and their 50,000 supporters.
Jolly well done to the VAR.

Edited by Willo (05 Sep 2022 10.05am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View palace chick's Profile palace chick Flag South Croydon 05 Sep 22 10.08am Send a Private Message to palace chick Add palace chick as a friend

Originally posted by Willo

So far as I can see with my aged eyes, Mitchell just put his hand up as they were both challenging for the ball and any contact was minimal, there was no shove, Willock then leapt into Guaita and knocked him to the ground.FOUL.

I suspect three will be those who are of the opinion that I am in dire need of an urgent visit to 'SpecSavers'!

Edited by Willo (05 Sep 2022 9.55am)

As you say the Newcastle player flattened our goalkeeper. Doesn’t matter if he could get the ball or not. It was a foul and with it or without VAR it was correct not to allow the goal. VAR then the ref looking at the screen made the correct decision. I would like to think I would feel the same way if it was a goal for us being overruled if one of our players flattened the opponents goalkeeper :-)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View doombear's Profile doombear Flag Too far from Selhurst Park 05 Sep 22 11.42am Send a Private Message to doombear Add doombear as a friend

Originally posted by Willo

So far as I can see with my aged eyes, Mitchell just put his hand up as they were both challenging for the ball and any contact was minimal, there was no shove, Willock then leapt into Guaita and knocked him to the ground.FOUL.

I suspect three will be those who are of the opinion that I am in dire need of an urgent visit to 'SpecSavers'!

Edited by Willo (05 Sep 2022 9.55am)


I've looked back at the incident a number of times and it is clear that Willock would have wiped out Guaita whether or not Mitchell had made contact with him (and I've been to Specsavers!)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View mtp1958's Profile mtp1958 Flag Grays 05 Sep 22 11.50am Send a Private Message to mtp1958 Add mtp1958 as a friend

Just seen the disallowed goal , the ref didnt make a clear and obvious mistake so he didnt need to change , it was a goal , but makes a change to get in our favour ,

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 20 of 22 < 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > Palace Talk > Newcastle Utd vs Crystal Palace - Match Thread